DETAILED ACTION
This is in reference to communication received 28 May 2026. Claims 1 – 9 and 11 – 20 are pending for examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 – 9 and 11 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Independent claim 1, representative of claims 15 and 18, in part is directed toward a statutory category of invention, the claim appears to be directed toward a judicial exception namely an abstract idea. Claim 1 recites invention directed to a serving modified content for presentation to a client. Content sponsor approved data indicative of a pool of individuals for whom inclusion in a campaign of a content sponsor is received from the content sponsor; has been approved by the content sponsor; when determination is made that content of the content sponsor is to be presented to a user, based upon online activities of the user, an individual to be included in the content item is selected; after the individual is identified and selected, selected content is modified by inserting image of the selected individual within bounds of identified replaceable region in the content, in addition, surrounding content that fills at least an area between the identified bounds of the replaceable region and the inserted image is also inserted into the area of the content item between the identified bounds of the replaceable region and the inserted image; and the modified image is served to be presented to the client.
These limitations describe marketing/sales/advertising activities. when it is determined that a content meets content provider approved data and it can be presented to a user, said content is selected, and modified by adding an image of an influencer in a blank-region of the content, and in-addition, also adding surrounding content in the portion of the blank-region of the image after image of the individual is added to the content, and serving the modified image for presentation to the client. Causing presentation of the modified content to a client would be the marketing team (or person) providing, such as a visual presentation, the modified content to the provided to the user for presentation.
In addition, Generative AI model, deep neural network, saliency classification, or an object detection model are used to identify the salient area on the image and add the supplemental-content and the image of the selected individual in the salient area as claimed would also be part of the sales and marketing team (or person) automating their content modifying functions to produce modified visual presentation for presentation to the client-user.
Represented claims 15 and 18, which do recite statutory categories (machine, product of manufacture, for example), the same analysis as above applies to these claims since the method steps are the same. However, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. These claims add the generic computer components (additional elements) of a system comprising one or more hardware processors and a memory (claim 15), and a non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising instructions that when executed by a processor of a machine cause the machine to perform the method addressed above (claim 18).
The processor, memory, and non-transitory machine-readable medium are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of the processor, memory, and non-transitory machine-readable medium amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible.
When taken as an ordered combination, nothing is added that is not already present when the elements are taken individually. When viewed as a whole, the marketing activities amount to instructions applied using generic computer components.
As for dependent claims 2 – 9, 11 – 14 and 19 – 20 dependent on the aforementioned independent claims, and include all the limitations contained therein. These claims do not recite any additional technical elements, and simply disclose additional limitations that further limit the abstract idea with details regarding Providing an user-interface resembling a dashboard to enable a content-sponsor to manage their campaign, defining that deep-neural-network machine-learning technology, saliency-classification-model, etc. will be used, defining what user activities will be considered to content modifying and content presentation eligibility, and defining that the content will be provided to the user only after they have been selected as an eligible content to receive the content.. Thus, the dependent claims merely provide additional non-structural (and predominantly non-functional) details that fail to meaningfully limit the claims or the abstract idea(s).
Therefore, claims 1 – 9 and 11 – 20 are not drawn to eligible subject matter, as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's argument that pending claimed amended invention is eligible for patent because cited prior art does not teach the amended invention is acknowledged and accepted.
Applicant's argument that pending claimed amended invention is eligible for patent under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention improves machine learning models by using (i) a trained deep neural network to select an individual to include in a content item, (ii) a saliency classification model or an objection detection model to identify bounds of a replaceable region of the content item, and (iii) a generative Al model to generate surrounding content that fills at least an area between the identified bounds of the replaceable region and the inserted image. By combining three machine learning models, the claimed invention generates a modified content item with an image of an individual having special relevance to the user which is seamlessly blended with the adjoining areas of the content item.
However, upon further review, it is deemed that the claimed invention is using (e.g., applying) a saliency classification model or an objection detection model to identify blank-space in the content, and using Generative-AI to leverage certain person (e.g., an influencer) to make them part of their advertising content to show that the influencer is marketing on their behalf, and using . Therefore, it is deemed that the invention as currently claimed is not eligible for patent under 35 USC 101.
Applicant's argument that pending claimed amended invention is eligible for patent under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention solves a technical problem which is how to include an aspect of a content item specifically targeted to a user without having to completely regenerate a new content item. Instead, the claimed invention can insert an image into a previously generated content item without having to generate a new content item. This improves computational efficiency.
However, upon further review, it is deemed that the claimed invention is using (e.g., applying) Generative-AI to leverage certain person (e.g., an influencer) to make them part of their advertising content to show that the influencer is marketing on their behalf. Therefore, it is deemed that the invention as currently claimed is not eligible for patent under 35 USC 101.
Applicant's argument that pending claimed amended invention is eligible for patent under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention improves the display by "improv[ing] performance in one respect (by adding the image of the individual) without having to sacrifice performance in another respect (e.g., due to degraded aesthetic appeal of the content item)."
However, upon further review, it is deemed that the claimed invention is using (e.g., applying) Generative-AI to leverage certain person (e.g., an influencer) to make them part of their advertising content to show that the influencer is marketing on their behalf. Therefore, it is deemed that the invention as currently claimed is not eligible for patent under 35 USC 101.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xin Tian et al. published article “Saliency Detection”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Naresh Vig whose telephone number is (571)272-6810. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 06:30a - 04:00p.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ilana Spar can be reached at 571.270.7537. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NARESH VIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622
June 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights